Topic: Game Informer's 'reviewable copy' of Rebel Strike as many a 20 builds away from the final version

[Bishman]

Thanks to our one and only fish MrGlubGlub

"I just got off the phone with Mr. Eggebrecht, and it turns out that the build that GI reviewed is far from the final (in fact, it is as much as 20 builds away from the final). When I told him the build I had in my possession, (labeled 'review copy' by Lucasarts) he was shocked, and called certain levels outright unplayable. It seems someone at Lucasarts accidentally sent out this incredibly early build, and Factor5 is currently working to rectify this.
Unfortunately, most print media has already gone to the presses, so print reviews of RS3 will be grossly inaccurate." -- AMUSIX

[mouse_clicker]

Well, the magazines certainly aren't going to print any corrections or revised reviews. Whatever, at least WE'LL be getting the final build- I can't imagine the reviewers surprise when they got, assumedly, such buggy games to play.

[akdaman1]

that dude should be fired. alot of people will be turned off by the reviews . this could cost lucas arts millions of dollars.

[Infernal Monkey]

Why would you go ahead and print a review if some of the levels don't even friggin' play? THIS GAME SEEMS BROKEN, WHO CARES, LETS JUST QUICKLY REVIEW IT AND GO BACK TO PETTING OUR MONEY HATS!

[PIAC]

MY MONEY HAT IS CALLED MITTENS! but yeah, morons get ++

[nitsu niflheim]

Quote
Why would you go ahead and print a review if some of the levels don't even friggin' play? THIS GAME SEEMS BROKEN, WHO CARES, LETS JUST QUICKLY REVIEW IT AND GO BACK TO PETTING OUR MONEY HATS!

Tomb Raider: Angel of Darkness anyone?  Being sarcastic to reviewing games that are unplayable.  Also the Matrix game.

[Bill Aurion]

This happened with a PC game recently, though I can't remember which...

But it does make me feel a whole lot better

[GoldShadow1]

"Why would you go ahead and print a review if some of the levels don't even friggin' play? THIS GAME SEEMS BROKEN, WHO CARES, LETS JUST QUICKLY REVIEW IT AND GO BACK TO PETTING OUR MONEY HATS! "

I think your taking Eggebrecht's words too seriously - when he says "unplayable" I think he's referring to the frame rate - you can still play them, they just impair the gameplay too much to be worth the bother.  Considering how many games have places like this, I don't think it's a stretch to assume it's the final build.  You really can't blame the reviewers for reviewing something labeled as the review copy, come on.

[egman]

GoldShadow 1--I see what you're saying. I suspect that this is damage control by someone disappointed with the reviews coming in. And even if the technical issues have been cleared (which I think is a strong possiblity because Factor 5 stated that they would be working to the last minute), I don't think reviews will be much better. Many people have had issues with the gameplay since the first game. I love the the series, but like PN 03, I know that many people will not be able to get past certain elements.

The game will sell well on the license and the technical mastery alone, but that will be in spite of what I predict is going to be reviews mostly in the 7 range. It'll do good business, but I'd imagine that Factor 5 will feel somewhat disappointed with scores after really trying to give gamers more bang for the buck.

[SuperLink666]

what dumb person sent it out lol yes it will cost them because some people get turned off by reviews thats why they should wait until the game is in stores..

[AdvancedGamer]

A week ago a bunch of my friends were talking about getting it and now their all like omg that game sucks according to game informer and they are not going to get it. That guy should defintly be fired.

[Uglydot]

That is increadibly stupid....

[akdaman1]

i dont blame the readers for getting turned off... if VJ came out and got nothing but 6 and 7s then i would be turned off as well.  

[Perfect Cell]

Theres an interesting thread on this, on the Gameinformer boards. The GI crew incruding former PGC Billy say that this is not true, and  their version is identical to the retail copy.... I hope not. Still ill rent before buying it

[mouse_clicker]

I tend to believe Julian Eggebrecht a bit more than GI. Sorry, Billy, I don't like Game Informer.

[Grey Ninja]

Whatever.  Game Informer doesn't dictate my purchases.  I am buying this game as soon as it's available.

[mouse_clicker]

I've already got it preordered, despite my craptastic Electronics Boutique being out of bonus discs.

Personally, though, I'd like to know why GI is so sure they have the actual final release- obviously it would say that on the disc, but how can they prove it's true?

::EDIT:: I was right, here's a quote from Billy:

Quote
Our builds that we played were review builds (it says Review in bright red lettering on the disc), and were probably the same exact builds as EGM, Play, and the rest.

Of COURSE it says "Review" on it- if this whole ordeal is true, the idiot who sent the early build out AS the review copy wouldn't have left in labeled. I don't blame them for reviewing, since for all they knew it WAS the final build, but if Mr. Eggebrecht is telling the truth, I don't see how they can defend themselves, especially with evidence like that.

[Koopa Troopa]

I don't understand why the mags are getting so defensive, if it is true it isn't their fault. I think it would be in good form to print some sort of retraction, though (and they all have the same, perfect scapegoat.)

[Gibdo Master]

I'm really glad these bad reviews were the result of a mix up. I loved Rogue Squadron and Rogue Leader and have been really looking foward to Rebel Strike. Seeing all these bad reviews coming out was really scaring the crap out of me. I mean I could blow off a crappy review from Game Informer but seeing EGM give it a bad review especially after the good reviews they gave Rogue Leader was worrying. I was pretty confused too since cube.ign.com has been praising the game every chance they get.  

[Ian Sane]

Isn't Game Informer the mag that reviewed Eternal Darkness (and gave it a crappy score) a year or so before it came out?  This isn't the same situation but I don't really considered GI as a reliable review source.

This "mix up" could be real and it couldn't be.  It doesn't really matter for me anyway since I pre-ordered it so if it sucks I'm stuck with it.  I didn't really have any problems with the demo except for the aiming on the land based levels which seemed a little wonky.  I've gotten used to it but I could see some reviewers criticizing the controls if the aiming and moving is the same on the final copy.  In the reviews written thus far what are the complaints?

[Deguello]

Ian, I believe it was Replay magazine that review Eternal Darkness a whole 3-4 months before actual release.  They gave it 6 or so, which on the birght side is a very good score for an unfinished game.  

This doesn't surprise me at all nowadays.  EGM has been known to review Beta copies as final products.  And just recently, Gamespot had a review pulled because they reviewed some MMORPG (Savage Realm, or something like that) after only playing it for 2 hours.  How we know this?  The reviewer gave it a bad score and the company retaliated with log records showing the reviewer's account was only logged on for a very short amount of time.  Now, I'm not saying the game was perfect,  nor am I saying that there is an amount of time you MUST play a game before you say it's crap, but this guy is PAID to write reviews for games, and it is quite obvious that he did not play it that much, and is therefore unfit to review it.

On ther other hand, MMORPGs are very difficult to review, becuase you gan get attached to them and then you now have a sorta skewed vision of the game.  And yes, there is something to be said about the deadlines involved in the game magazine journo biz.  But I don't find that to be an excuse for compromising your journalistic integrity.  It is better to be late with the truth than early with a lie.

[mouse_clicker]

deguello: No, I'm fairly certain it was Game Informer- I could be wrong of course, but I remember pretty well seeing them review Eternal Darkness (or, should I say, the E3 demo of Eternal Darkness, which was intentionally stripped down and had large parts fabricated specifically for it that didn't even appear in the final game) anf giving it a really bad score. Even if it wasn't GI, I've read their magazine and I'm not too fond of it- come to think of it, I'm not too fond of any videogame magazine, be it Game Informer, EGM, GMR, whatever.  

Man, Billy got all pissy and locked the thread right after I posted on Game Informer. I sent him a private message- I hope he responds.  

[ThePerm]

lol i feel sorry for billy...he gets paid...but yes i do beleive it was game informer who revirewed eternal darkness way before it came out......so damn laughable. The last time i bought a game informer was right before wwf attitude came out......